Re: [Isis-wg] WG Adoption poll for draft-hegde-isis-advertising-te-protocols

"Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com> Sat, 21 October 2017 16:57 UTC

Return-Path: <ginsberg@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39DA1126E64 for <isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 21 Oct 2017 09:57:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -12.621
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-12.621 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NrPFmJY9GOqu for <isis-wg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 21 Oct 2017 09:57:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B2801241F3 for <isis-wg@ietf.org>; Sat, 21 Oct 2017 09:57:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2645; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1508605037; x=1509814637; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=EgtbA4MmwSwH/KeWQV/drMsPENZVAI54zS+tB7iIGEY=; b=LBHnyR3IGDJSAB+4VcGWLijRLU99Z9tP6dLuSPFkrYaoUvPYxHco6zUu FS+G0QjvMbM+D486rr1FHoUs/EL8ruwAxz0rPNsl5iXoPIGFbPRf9aSw/ MHIBHc6KQGrqEJJKGRMiQ8+waFPwbOcm1lUbnf4ERHAKBSuTwTsUiO3oy s=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CuAADze+tZ/5xdJa1cGQEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBBwEBAQEBg19kbicHjhKPQIF6ljmCEQoYD4UUAoQ8PxgBAgEBAQEBAQFrKIU?= =?us-ascii?q?dAQEBBAEBODQXBAIBCBEEAQEfCQcnCxQJCAIEARIIihgQrR+LIAEBAQEBAQEBA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBAQEBAQEBAQEBARgFgy6CB4FQgWgBgyqFK4VPBaEUUgKHYo0Hgh6FeosSlU8?= =?us-ascii?q?CERkBgTgBHziBW3oVSYJkhF92AYlPgREBAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.43,411,1503360000"; d="scan'208";a="20177224"
Received: from rcdn-core-5.cisco.com ([173.37.93.156]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 21 Oct 2017 16:57:16 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-005.cisco.com (xch-rcd-005.cisco.com [173.37.102.15]) by rcdn-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v9LGvGG2008909 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sat, 21 Oct 2017 16:57:16 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-001.cisco.com (173.36.7.11) by XCH-RCD-005.cisco.com (173.37.102.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1320.4; Sat, 21 Oct 2017 11:57:15 -0500
Received: from xch-aln-001.cisco.com ([173.36.7.11]) by XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com ([173.36.7.11]) with mapi id 15.00.1320.000; Sat, 21 Oct 2017 11:57:15 -0500
From: "Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <ginsberg@cisco.com>
To: Julien Meuric <julien.meuric@orange.com>, "isis-wg@ietf.org" <isis-wg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Isis-wg] WG Adoption poll for draft-hegde-isis-advertising-te-protocols
Thread-Index: AQHTPxYHrHG571lUpkWJFBhDImQkMqLtMUCAgAFoPwA=
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 16:57:14 +0000
Message-ID: <c2211554298f416591415d9d25b5e355@XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com>
References: <87infr1xw0.fsf@chopps.org> <849fc9ab-afe8-b708-de9d-8b628b57c74c@orange.com>
In-Reply-To: <849fc9ab-afe8-b708-de9d-8b628b57c74c@orange.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.24.82.177]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/isis-wg/5BRq6VC34CZRuhZR0VUox7QjmXM>
Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] WG Adoption poll for draft-hegde-isis-advertising-te-protocols
X-BeenThere: isis-wg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IS-IS working group <isis-wg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/isis-wg>, <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/isis-wg/>
List-Post: <mailto:isis-wg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg>, <mailto:isis-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2017 16:57:19 -0000

Julien -

I think the issue you raise first needs to be discussed in CCAMP (or perhaps MPLS) WG. If there is agreement that this is a problem which needs to be addressed then a draft can be written. Perhaps this is RFC 5073bis - perhaps something else.

As far as link level signaling, in IS-IS there is already provision for that using link attributes sub-TLV defined in RFC 5029: https://www.iana.org/assignments/isis-tlv-codepoints/isis-tlv-codepoints.xhtml#isis-tlv-codepoints-19of22
If signaling is required to address the issue you raise that would be the most appropriate place to do it.

I don't think your issue is in scope for either draft-hegde-isis-advertising-te-protocols or draft-ietf-isis-te-app.

   Les


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Isis-wg [mailto:isis-wg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Julien Meuric
> Sent: Friday, October 20, 2017 7:15 AM
> To: isis-wg@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] WG Adoption poll for draft-hegde-isis-advertising-te-
> protocols
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I support the adoption of draft-hegde-isis-advertising-te-protocols as a
> foundation for a WG item. A per-link "Capability sub-TLV" (the term
> "protocol" might be too specific here) really adds a missing piece after RFC
> 5073.
> 
> Once WG document, we may discuss an additional use case suggested by
> that RFC: on top of RSVP-TE support, distinguish between 3209-only and
> 3473-capable. Indeed, there are parameters like SRLGs that were defined as
> part of GMPLS extensions: an implementation (wildly) guessing RFC
> 3473 support from that would not be fully wrong. Similarly, an
> implementation may perfectly support 3473 even if it has not explicitly
> advertise a PSC switching capability on a given link. Let us make these
> explicit!
> 
> My 2 cents,
> 
> Julien
> 
> 
> Oct. 07, 2017 - Christian Hopps:
> > Hi Folks,
> >
> > The authors have requested the IS-IS WG adopt
> >
> >
> > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-hegde-isis-advertising-te-proto
> > cols/
> >
> > as a working group document. Please indicate your support or
> > no-support for taking on this work.
> >
> > Authors: Please indicate your knowledge of any IPR related to this
> > work to the list as well.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Chris & Hannes.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Isis-wg mailing list
> > Isis-wg@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Isis-wg mailing list
> Isis-wg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg